Husk mig
▼ Indhold

Bemærkelsesværdige citater.....



Side 10 af 13<<<89101112>>>
02-09-2010 21:59
Frank Lansner
★★★★★
(4537)
New York Post "Meltdown of the climate consensus":
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/meltdown_of_the_climate_consensus_G0kWdclUvwhVr6DYH6A4uJ#ixzz0yP60yzgq

..Overall, the IAC slammed the IPCC for reporting "high confidence in some statements for which there is little evidence. Furthermore, by making vague statements that were difficult to refute..
02-09-2010 22:11
GLARProfilbillede★★★★☆
(1023)
>>Og nu i 2010 ser det ud til, at havisudbredelsen i Arktis slår alle minimumsrekorder - selv den ekstreme
minimumsudbredelse, som blev målt i 2007.

Tendensen er entydig - med bl.a. den mindre isudbredelse og temperaturrekorderne er kloden populært sagt
på vej mod "hedeslag".<<


Citat_
Carsten Bjerg, koncernchef for Grundfos, Sebastian H. Mernild, klima- og polarforsker, Los Alamos National Laboratory USA

http://jp.dk/opinion/kronik/article2170110.ece

Her gik jeg i min naivitet og troede,at Sebastian H. Mernild var alene om at have en 'hæklefejl i kysen'.... Fru Bjerg Sr. var åbenbart heller ikke til håndarbejde.
Redigeret d. 02-09-2010 22:19
03-09-2010 12:57
Andy
☆☆☆☆☆
(21)
Det er åbentlyst en kronik skrevet tidligere på året, sandsynligvis tilbage i foråret, da dykket i havisens udbredelse var markant. Det ser ud til at være samtidig med Mernilds klumme fra juni.

Det er jo så blot ærgerligt at man ikke har fået læst den igennem inden den blev offentliggjort, så man kunne få ryddet den misforståelse af vejen. Desværre er der jo nok folk som ikke checker data selv, som vil tro på det.

Det er interessant at se hvordan Mernild i stadig stigende grad fastholder at forældede facts er den nuværende virkelighed. Det er nok noget vi kommer til at se meget til i fremtiden.

/Andy
21-09-2010 22:21
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center:

I stand by my previous statements that the Arctic summer sea ice cover is in a death spiral. It's not going to recover.

I hate to say it but I think we are committed to a four- to six-degree warmer Arctic

KILDE: Arctic Ice in Death Spiral (20/9-10)


Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
26-09-2010 09:17
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
"How do you explain the warmest year on record in the Arctic, yet the least ice melt? Surely if it's that warm, then the sea ice should have gone below the 2007 record. Now this guy comes on and claims it has... it's in the THICKNESS. Yet we have the U.S. Navy showing that simply is not true. Are the U.S. Navy people now part of a denial conspiracy? EITHER IT WASN'T THAT WARM AS THEY LED US TO BELIEVE, OR THE ICE IS NOT IN AS BAD SHAPE. YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS"

http://www.accuweather.com/ukie/bastardi-europe-blog.asp?partner=accuweather

....
26-09-2010 10:30
Kosmos
★★★★★
(3946)
How do you explain the warmest year on record in the Arctic, yet the least ice melt? Surely if...

- det bør nok holdes for øje, at selvom lufttemperaturen (ved overfladen) naturligvis spiller en vis rolle ifm. dannelse/forsvinden af havis, så er der andre faktorer, såsom vind og havstrømme, der i mindst lige så høj grad er bestemmende for udbredelse og tykkelse.
26-09-2010 12:55
GLARProfilbillede★★★★☆
(1023)
@Kosmos

Problemet er at isen måles i km2... og ikke i km3

http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/icecover.uk.php måles => 30 % dækket af is... Hvis vinden eller strømmen f.eks. sammenpresser 3 x 30 % på 1 km2 til 90% på et enkelt døgn.. så er isen i princippet aftaget med 2 km2 i statestikken.

Men isens volume er den samme.

En kraftig storm i området kan sammenpresse isen til en højde svarende til et 2-3 etagers hus.... efter en sådan storm mangler der flere tusinde km2 havis... men volumen er den samme.

Så udbredelsen af havis skal tages med et nogle meget store forbehold... det glemmes ofte i prognoserne.

Go' weekend
30-09-2010 10:24
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
Britain's leading scientific institution has been forced to rewrite its guide to climate change and admit that there is greater uncertainty about future temperature increases than it had previously suggested.


"Royal Society blinks – embraces sceptics and uncertainty":

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/29/royal-society-blinks-embraces-sceptics-and-uncertainty/#more-25598

Lidt, sker der da!

.....
06-10-2010 12:54
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
"I think I can predict right now the headlines that will follow publication of the next report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), due in 2013. "Climate scientists back off predicting rate of warming: 'The more we know the less we can be sure of,' says UN panel."


Fred Pearce med meget læseværdig artikel om ny generation af klimamodeller og følgende større usikkerhed.


En kommentar til artiklen fra læser:

"Your article listed many of the flaws that skeptics have identified in the IPCC reports. In most cases, the authors and manager of the reports appeared to be aware these were present and published anyway because they wanted to influence the public and government to take action.

Now you are concerned that publishing accurate and honest information will reduce credibility, and you continue the mantra that action is needed now. To meaningfully reduce carbon dioxide emissions, the entire coal, oil, and natural gas fired electrical generating capacity and transportation capacity of the world must shut down and replaced with something not yet available or even identified. Billions of people will be adversely affected, but we should do it anyway because there is a chance that sea levels might rise and the globe might warm by 1 C (or more) in the next century.

Credibility would be enhanced by more honesty and better judgment. Credibility would be enhanced by funding and publishing articles exploring alternative explanations for climate change such as natural variability. Credibility would be enhanced if the people promoting the CAGW side would stop attacking the intelligence and morals of anyone who points out the very flaws you mention in this article. Credibility was lost because it was not credible to assert that the 'science is settled' when in fact it is not.

Credibility will be difficult to recover as long as the same people who caused it to be lost are in charge of publishing the IPCC and similar reports."


http://e360.yale.edu/feature/on_climate_models_the_case_for_living_with_uncertainties/2325/

Fandt linket hos Roger Pielke jr.:

http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2010/10/uncertainty-and-ignorance-get-used-to.html

Som også henviser til Judith Curry, der har langt essay (analyse) om netop klimamodeller:

http://judithcurry.com/2010/10/03/what-can-we-learn-from-climate-models/

Overskriften lyder:

What can we learn from climate models?

Og dernæst svarer hun selv:

"Short answer: I'm not sure."


Jeg bringer dette i denne tråd, så der ikke oprettes alt for mange nye emner, som muligvis slet ikke bliver debatterede eller kommenterede!


...
07-10-2010 17:33
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
"Turns out that the Maunder minimum must have been hot. Throw all the historical records out, we have a new three year study"
:

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2010/10/07/breaking-news-the-sun-influences-temperatures-on-earth/#more-3759

Også Watts har (blandt mange andre på nettet) nyheden: (selvom han har omtalt den i tidligere post):

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/06/study-sheds-new-light-on-how-the-sun-affects-the-earths-climate/

Mon ikke man er ved at forberede os på usikkerhederne i de ny klimamodeller? Selvom det selvfølgelig slås fast, at det (soleklart) er menneskeudledt co2, der er hoveddrivkraften bag global opvarmning – nå nej "klimaforstyrrelser" hedder det jo nu.


Det er da efterhånden godt nok, til at blive helt rundtosset over!
....
09-10-2010 09:15
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
"For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society."



Watts bringer denne overskrift:

Hal Lewis: My Resignation From The American Physical Society – an important moment in science history

Og skriver videre:

This is an important moment in science history. I would describe it as a letter on the scale of Martin Luther, nailing his 95 theses to the Wittenburg church door. It is worthy of repeating this letter in entirety on every blog that discusses science.

What I would really like to see though, is this public resignation letter given the same editorial space as Michael Mann in today's Washington Post.


Så hermed gjort:

Sent: Friday, 08 October 2010 17:19 Hal Lewis
From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society
6 October 2010

Dear Curt:
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago).

Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?

How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d'être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.

It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford's book organizes the facts very well.) I don't believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.
So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it.

For example:
1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate

2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer "explanatory" screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society is at stake.

3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.

4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.

5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members' interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.

6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.
APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?
I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people's motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don't think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don't have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I'm not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.

I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.
Hal
....................................................................................................................
Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President's Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making)


Link:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/08/hal-lewis-my-resignation-from-the-american-physical-society/#more-26117

- Det kommer jo nok, igen, igen, igen, ig...., ikke i mainstram - eller ku man håbe, der dog bliver en slags omtale og evt. drøftelse af, hvad det egentlig er manden skriver??? (Men han vil nok blive afvist som værende "neokonservativ","reaktionær" senil, bitter gammel mand, der jo ingen fremtid har i det forfærdelige klima, der venter verden fremover) Det er i hvert fald forstemmende læsning, men ikke nyt, for så vidt, for de der er skeptiske overfor hele dette show.

....
Redigeret d. 09-10-2010 09:39
13-10-2010 13:35
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
"I feel certain that the head of factual programming will be telephoning to commission a miniseries based on The Hockey Stick Illusion, so I'll wait by the phone today..."


Kommenterer Bishop Hill i indlæg:

BBC vil holde op med at være forudindtaget

http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2010/10/13/bbc-will-stop-being-biased.html

...
21-10-2010 09:42
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
"Efter vores mening, gør Daniel Greenberg's boganmeldelse af "The Climate Fix" af Roger Pielke Jr., jeres læserskare en bjørnetjeneste, ved at besudle integriteten af klimaforskningssamfundet"

Skriver Michael Mann, Paul Ehrlich and Sefan Rahmstorf i brev til Nature efter at Daniel Greenberg har anmeldt Pielke jr.'s bog The Climate Fix positivt i Nature.

Således fortsætter disse klimaforskere hetzen mod dem, de opfatter som "dissidenter"! Mon disse udfald tjener dem i længden - især efter climate-gate?

http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2010/10/besmirched.html

...
23-10-2010 18:26
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
"We've seen a lot of strawmen from Judy lately," Schneider said. "It is frankly shocking to see such a good scientist take that kind of a turn to sloppy thinking. I have no explanation for it."



"If you are going to say that this year or that decade is the hottest, you had better have a good idea of what temperatures have actually been over those hundreds of years—and Curry, along with many skeptics, does not think we have as good a handle on that as the scientific community believes"


Skriver scientificamerican i stor artikel om Judy Curry under overskriften

Climate Heretic: Judith Curry Turns on Her Colleagues

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=climate-heretic



Selvom Judith Curry er overbevist om menneskeskabt global opvarmning og støtter den videnskabelige konsensus, betragtes hun som dissident og en slags forræder i den verden, der hedder klimavidenskab. Fordi hun gider at kommunikere med skeptikere og delvist kritiserer IPCC. "The establishment" mener, at hun gør enorm skade, fordi skeptikere nu siges at tage hende til indtægt for, at det de siger/har sagt, er rigtigt.

Jeg synes jo hun er modig og ville ønske, der var flere af hendes slags. Hun står jo stadigvæk fast på sine grundholdninger, så hvad er skaden egentlig, andet end en åbning og en debat og kommunikation omkring noget, der påvirker de flestes liv?

Men selvfølgelig, vil argumentet være, der er ikke tid nok til den slags diskussioner, inden verden står overfor katastrofer så enorme, at der ikke kan gøres noget. Men hvad pokker hjælper det så, at ville standse co2 udledning, med en effekt, der så vidt jeg ved, vil være minimal engang ude i fremtiden, når man i stedet ville kunne anvende pengene til, at afhjælpe de (eventuelle) skader, det måtte medføre (hvis det altså sker!). Og det altså, hvis man tror, at det vil gå sådan, og at menneskeudledt co2 er årsagen. Jeg forstår det ganske enkelt ikke, og kommer nok heller aldrig til det. Udover pengeinteresser og ære...nok mest det første, efterhånden, i den politiske verden i al fald.

For mange "almindelige" mennesker er det nok en slags angst og kampen mellem det "gode og onde", "helte og skurke". At "frelse verden" er ikke nogen ny trang. Den smyger sig igennem, især, den nyere historie og de store ideologiers tid. Inden da, har denne trang til renhed kontra skyld, haft religiøs karakter. Men da de store ideologier er døde og også gud er død (indtil videre), er det nu blevet klimaets tur. Så den nye "gud" er måske videnskaben?

Forskning i, og udvikling af vedvarende energikilder, er i alle tilfælde en god idé for vores samfund – så kan konsensusfolket jo være glade over, at vi alle kan se forskellige gode grunde til at omstille. Det er blot årsagerne (almindelig partikelforurening, sikkerhed, ressourcer, som mange skeptikere nok vil være enige i - og for konsensusfolket, så altså også fremtidige katastrofescenarier på grund af menneskeudledt co2) og tempoet, der skiller os ad!
27-10-2010 11:48
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
Judith Curry, who heads the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Fra ARTIKEL i Scientific American:

(Jeg tager ikke stilling her til hendes fremgangsmåde)

"There's a whole host of unknown unknowns that we don't even know how to quantify but that should be factored into our confidence level."


One example she cites is the "hockey stick" chart showing that current temperatures are the warmest in hundreds of years. If you are going to say that this year or that decade is the hottest, you had better have a good idea of what temperatures have actually been over those hundreds of years—and Curry, along with many skeptics, does not think we have as good a handle on that as the scientific community believes.

Jeg stemmer for at vi (menneskerheden) ikke nævne KLIMA igen indtil vi (videnskaben) ved med sikkerhed hvad KLIMA er for en størrelse. At vi ikke siger noget som helst om klima områder som vi er ikke helt sikker på.


Jep. Jeg stemmer for AT VERDENS UDVIKLING FÅR LOV TIL AT FORTSÆTTE indtil vi er helt sikker på hvad der forgår med klimaet for tiden, er helt sikker på hvad der forgik i fortiden, er helt sikker på hvad der ville ske i fremtiden, hvordan eller hvis vi kan ændre tingene, hvad det ville koste og hvem skal betale.

Ikke bare det, men jeg stemmer for AT VERDENS UDVIKLING FÅR LOV AT FORTSÆTTE indtil alle de ukendte ukendter er også taget med i beregningerne


Curry's krav til videnskaben rykker overlæggeren et tand højer synes jeg



Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
27-10-2010 13:03
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
@ rick_uk


Hvad bliver "nyordet" så for klima ? Det ku jo tænkes, det kan blive svært, ikke at referere til det, på en eller anden måde, også selvom du foreslår at holde op med at bruge ordet. (Om du får "menneskeheden" med på det, er jo en anden sag)


Jeg har i hvert fald ikke tænkt mig at holde op med at bruge det. Og det ku være, der ind i mellem opstår nogle "samtaler" og så er det jo rart, at vide, hvad der tales om.

....
Redigeret d. 27-10-2010 13:07
27-10-2010 15:18
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
@rick_uk

For en god ordens skyld, med hensyn til Judith Curry, skulle du måske læse hendes reaktion på artiklen i Scientific American.

Det har du måske allerede gjort - men sådan fremstår det ikke for mig.

Den er lang, og giver en ganske glirende beskrivelse af hendes udvikling og til den position hun er i dag.

Jeg har henvist til den tidligere under emnet "videnskabelig arrogance"

Her er lidt udpluk:

If you think that I am a big part of the cause of the problems you are facing, I suggest that you think about this more carefully. I am doing my best to return some sanity to this situation and restore science to a higher position than the dogma of consensus. You may not like it, and my actions may turn out to be ineffective, futile, or counterproductive in the short or long run, by whatever standards this whole episode ends up getting judged. But this is my carefully considered choice on what it means to be a scientist and to behave with personal and professional integrity.


Og

What happened? Did the skeptics and the oil companies and the libertarian think tanks win? No, you lost. All in the name of supporting policies that I don't think many of you fully understand. What I want is for the climate science community to shift gears and get back to doing science, and return to an environment where debate over the science is the spice of academic life. And because of the high relevance of our field, we need to figure out how to provide the best possible scientific information and assessment of uncertainties. This means abandoning this religious adherence to consensus dogma


I følgende udpluk beskriver hun udviklingen:

During this period, I was comfortably ensconced in the ivory tower of academia, writing research papers, going to conferences, submitting grant proposals.


og fortsætter:

This all changed on September 14, 2005, when I participated in a press conference on our forthcoming paper that described a substantial increase in the global number of category 4 and 5 hurricanes. The unplanned and uncanny timing of publication of this paper was three weeks after Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans. While global warming was mentioned only obliquely in the paper, the press focused on the global warming angle and a media furor followed. We were targeted as global warming alarmists, capitalizing on this tragedy to increase research funding and for personal publicity, a threat to capitalism and the American way of life, etc.


At the same time, we were treated like rock stars by the environmental movement. Our 15 minutes stretched into days, weeks and months. Hurricane Katrina became a national focusing event for the global warming debate. We were particularly stung by criticisms from fellow research scientists who claimed that we were doing this "for the money" and attacked our personal and scientific integrity. We felt that one scientist in particular had crossed the line and committed a series of fouls, and this turned the scientific debate into academic guerrilla warfare between our team and the skeptics that was played out in the glare of the media.



http://judithcurry.com/2010/10/25/heresy-and-the-creation-of-monsters/

....
05-11-2010 15:11
Kosmos
★★★★★
(3946)
Et par tankevækkende citater mere:

Curry:

So it seems like we are gearing up for much more model development in terms of higher resolution and adding additional complexity. Yes, we will learn more about the climate models and possibly something new about how the climate system works. But it is not clear that any of this will provide useful information for decision makers on a time scale of less than 10 years to support decision making on stabilization targets, beyond the information presented in the AR4.


Lindzen:

In brief, we have the new paradigm where simulation and programs have replaced theory and observation, where government largely determines the nature of scientific activity, and where the primary role of professional societies is the lobbying of the government for special advantage.
(Kilde)
02-12-2010 21:10
Frank Lansner
★★★★★
(4537)
Jun Arima, Japansk official til Cancun topmødet idag:

"Japan will not inscribe its target under the Kyoto protocol on any conditions or under any circumstances."


Japan, "Kyoto-landet", dropper Kyoto. Med Kyoto forpligtede man sig til blot 5% lavere CO2 udledning i 2012 i forold til 1990.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/dec/01/cancun-climate-change-summit-japan-kyoto
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/02/breaking-japan-refuses-to-extend-kyoto-treaty-at-cancun/#more-28773
03-12-2010 11:28
Frank Lansner
★★★★★
(4537)
Den Russiske presse fortæller om fordele ved global warming der langt overstiger ulemper:

"However, "the reduction of heating alone outweighs all the negative results [of the global warming] by many times," Klimenko said. If the money saved through reducing heating "is spent sensibly, then something can be achieved," he said."

"Global warming in the next 40 years will allow Russian authorities to save on central heating, increase agricultural production and extend sea navigation in the north"


http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/for-russia-global-warming-benefits-outweigh-negatives/425466.html

Man kan sige, hvis russerne reelt tror på at der vil ske mange katastrofer rundt om i verden - bare ikke hos dem - og så handler derefter, så kan man måske sige at det ikke er så ædelt.

Men mange skeptikere sætter så iøvrigt spørgsmålstegn om det reelt er varme eller kulde der er foran os nu - det ses også i den russike presse, ikke mindst fra deres solforskere.
Redigeret d. 03-12-2010 11:28
05-12-2010 11:38
ISIS
★★☆☆☆
(361)
"Thus, whilst the Government is asking us to tighten our belts, are you really content for it to wager £20 billion a year on a theory, now formally deemed as uncertain by the Royal Society, that mankind is causing or even capable of causing alteration to the climate?"


I England er de lige begyndt med skrappe afgifter og så besparelser på det offentlige budget - med disse vintre bliver det da en katastrofe for de mange mennesker, der i forvejen knap har råd til at betale husleje (hvis de overhovedet har et sted at bo).

Om England kan man læse her:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100066436/never-mind-the-squeaky-voice-osborne-what-have-you-got-to-say-about-this/


Og mens det ser ud til at der er store sandsynligheder for at en del lande i Europa vil følge Irland og Grækenland med hensyn til dårlig økonomi, kan man jo muntre sig med læsning af denne nedslående artikel om Irland:

http://www.berlingske.dk/verden/spoegelsesbyer-og-fortabte-sjaele

Men selvfølgelig, hvis mennesker nu bliver nødt til at holde høns og grise og dyrke grøntsager i baghaverne, er det jo en – om end ufrivillig - omstilling til det "bæredygtige" og "small is beautifull" eller "tænk globalt - handl lokalt". Så der vil måske alligevel være nogen, der klapper i hænderne og tænker, at det jo på en eller anden barok måde er i orden, for det tjener en højere moral, nemlig at forhindre klodens tvivlsomme, måske tilstand, engang ude i en ikke helt præciseret fremtid.

...
Redigeret d. 05-12-2010 12:10
12-12-2010 00:15
Frank Lansner
★★★★★
(4537)
Bolivias præsident, Evo Morales omtales

Despite the claims of deniers who say global warming is a myth, the climate is changing dramatically in Bolivia and other Andean countries, Morales insists."The lakes are drying. There is drought. Millions of fish are dying in the Amazon basin of frost."

Skal man grine eller græde?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/dec/11/cancun-talks-evo-morales
12-12-2010 18:58
GLARProfilbillede★★★★☆
(1023)
@Frank Lansner

Forstå Morales ret:

Han skriger på varmehjælp !

http://wxmaps.org/pix/temp8.html
19-12-2010 23:51
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
WUWWT holder benægterenes drøm at 'Den Nye Lille Istid' kommer i (kunstig) live!
Den kommer i det mindste til Tyskland


Ville du vide mere om klimaet? Spørg en meteorolog


Thomas Globig from the weather service Meteo Media:

The year 2010 will be the coldest for ten years in Germany...It is quite possible that we are at the beginning of a Little Ice Age...Even the Arctic ice could spread further to the south.

Ikke overbevist? Læs videre:

It is already clear: the average temperatures in Germany this year...were 0.2 degrees below the long term measured average..

Så taber han tråden (det må være kulden
).

For 100 years it had not been as cold as in the first decade of December..

First decade of December?? - must have been lost in translation.

Men videre...Hvad er årsagen til denne (2 årig) tendens og den kommende ny lille istid?

Jep, you guessed it!! Solen!!

Globig sees two main causes for the significant cooling: First, the cyclical changes in the big air currents over the Atlantic, and second, the variations in solar activity.

....supported by the current development of solar activity. Solar activity has passed the zenith of a nearly 200 years continuing phase of high activity and will decline in coming decades. Around the years 2040/2050, scientists expect a new so-called solar minimum, with very little supply of solar energy into the Earth's atmosphere.

- og jeg gik og troede at det var kun 'varmisterne' der prøvet at skræmme folk (og spiste deres børn).

Og det bliver værre endnu!

I think it is even conceivable that the Arctic ice spreads significantly in the years to come

Og jep, det er også solens skyld:

The impact of solar activity on climate has been criminally underestimated for a long time.


Vi kan være glad for at WUWT:

- bliver ved med at komme med sandheden at klima videnskab prøver at skjulle.

- og igen og igen viser at man ikke behøver at have noget som helst viden om klimaet for at kunne forklare hvordan klodens bio- geo- fysisk systemer fungerer. Vi er alle eksperter


ALLE kan ikke andet at være enig med de sidste af Globigs' visdoms perler:

What actually will happen depends on the next five to ten years

That must be a classic!!


Den er næsten bedre end JC's ovenfor:

There's a whole host of unknown unknowns that we don't even know how to quantify but that should be factored into our confidence level


I think the denialists (inevitably - uundgåeligt) have completely lost the plot.... ......


Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
Redigeret d. 20-12-2010 00:02
20-12-2010 09:53
Frank Lansner
★★★★★
(4537)
Hej Rick!

Dit glimrende indlæg herover fortjener lidt respons, så jeg vender tilbage :-)

NEWS:
Pierres Corbyn fra Engelske Weather action har i årevis brugt Solens magnetisme og sågar Månens magetisme som med-input til hans langsigtede vejrprognoser. År efter år er det Pierre Corbyns forudsigelser der banker Engelske Metoffices super-model-baserede miserable prognoser til kingdom come.

Således har Pierre Corbyns succes nu vakt Borgmesteren i Longdons opmærksomhed. Han skriver:

"I have not a clue whether his methods are sound or not. But when so many of his forecasts seem to come true, and when he seems to be so consistently ahead of the Met Office, I feel I want to know more."



http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/19/the-mayor-of-london-gives-props-to-skeptic-piers-corbin/
20-12-2010 10:12
GLARProfilbillede★★★★☆
(1023)
Jeg har personligt kendt Piers Corbyn siden 2007 og fornyligt har han lavet sponsorerede Life-Safe-Warnings om vintervejret i UK og nærmeste omegn.

På min opfordring lavede han en vejrudsigt for Syd Norge, det Vestlige Sverige og med hovedvægten på Danmark under COP 15. Jeg er meget sikker på at Københavns Politi havde meget gavn af prognosen, der blev FW til Indsatsgruppen.

Piers Corbyn er så god til langtidsudsigter at han er black-listet hos de engelske bookmakere, når det gælder spil på vejret.

Piers Corbyn spår at det bliver koldere de næste 20-30 år... Så frem med de uldne vanter.
20-12-2010 20:15
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
Tak, Frank. Ja vi lever i spændende tider!

Fra atikelen du linker til:

Piers Corbyn believes that the last three winters could be the harbinger of a mini ice age that could be upon us by 2035, and that it could start to be colder than at any time in the last 200 years. He goes on to speculate that a genuine ice age might then settle in, since an ice age is now cyclically overdue.


OK, Boris J. har måske fejl 'citeret' ham. Det har jeg ikke undersøgt.

Men hvis der skulle komme en lille istid pga. lav sol aktivitet burde vi ikke se at eller andet tegn på en nedkølning af kloden snart?? Er det det vi ser i Europa nu, som Corbyn (måske) tror?


Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
Tilknyttet billede:


Redigeret d. 20-12-2010 20:17
20-12-2010 21:58
Kosmos
★★★★★
(3946)
Men hvis der skulle komme en lille istid pga. lav sol aktivitet burde vi ikke se at eller andet tegn på en nedkølning af kloden snart?? Er det det vi ser i Europa nu, som Corbyn (måske) tror?

- jamen det skulle du da ta' at spørge ham om; og siden fortælle os andre, hvad han svarede!
21-12-2010 16:17
kulden-varmenProfilbillede★★★★★
(2054)
rick_uk skrev:
Men hvis der skulle komme en lille istid pga. lav sol aktivitet burde vi ikke se at eller andet tegn på en nedkølning af kloden snart??


Ja, hvis klimaet er styret af solen, og solen har ligget i dvale, så må man forvendte kulde.

Men her møder du det problem at en tør atmosfære giver højere temperature Kl 12. En koldere atmosfære er mere tør, og derfor er der færre skyer og laver luftfugtighed og derfor stiger temperaturen hurtigere om morgen. I en fugtig atmosfære så stiger temperaturen frem til ved to-tre tiden og natten er lun.

Men havtemperaturene viser et fald fra 2006. Da havet har mere stabile temperature end luften så vil jeg tillade mig at antage at dette temperaturfald forsætter i mange år.


14-03-2011 22:29
Frank Lansner
★★★★★
(4537)
"China's emissions have been increasing by nearly 10 percent a year, and in 2010 probably surpassed the emissions of the entire Western Hemisphere."


http://www.kiowacountysignal.com/opinions/x1777807223/China-s-CO2-Emissions-Confirm-Kyoto-Critics-Fears
16-03-2011 16:32
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
Phil Plait in DISCOVER: Next up for Congress: repeal the law of gravity (15/3-11)

"Today, House Republicans made it clear just how antiscience they are (as if we didn't know already): they voted down a simple amendment declaring the reality of climate change. Not that it was human-caused, or dangerous, just that it existed. Which it does."

Y'know, whenever I use the term denier (as in "global warming denier") I get lots of comments accusing me of using a loaded word. But it's not: it's precise, and given what we're seeing in Congress, it's the exact word to use.



Rep. Markey in E&C Hearing asks GOP if they plan to legislate against Gravity, Relativity:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHVrE1NTgxI


Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
25-03-2011 10:23
Frank Lansner
★★★★★
(4537)
Her er en opsamling af citater der blandt andet tilskynder til overdrivelse. Jeg understreger: Jeg har ikke mulighed for at gennemgå, verificere osvosv. Lad os bare sige at nogle af disse er korrekte:

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=27941

"We need to get some broad based support, to capture the public's imagination... So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts... Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest." - Stephen Schneider, Stanford Professor of Climatology, lead author of many IPCC reports

"Unless we announce disasters no one will listen." - Sir John Houghton, first chairman of IPCC

"It doesn't matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true." - Paul Watson, co-founder of Greenpeace

"We've got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy." - Timothy Wirth, President of the UN Foundation

"No matter if the science of global warming is all phony... climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world." - Christine Stewart, fmr Canadian Minister of the Environment

"The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe." - emeritus professor Daniel Botkin

"We require a central organizing principle - one agreed to voluntarily. Minor shifts in policy, moderate improvement in laws and regulations, rhetoric offered in lieu of genuine change - these are all forms of appeasement, designed to satisfy the public's desire to believe that sacrifice, struggle and a wrenching transformation of society will not be necessary." - Al Gore, Earth in the Balance

"Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsiblity to bring that about?" - Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Programme

"A massive campaign must be launched to de-develop the United States. De-development means bringing our economic system into line with the realities of ecology and the world resource situation." - Paul Ehrlich, Professor of Population Studies

"Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control." - Professor Maurice King

"Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun." - Prof Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University

etc.

Og her kan man så tilføje oplevelsen af IPCC som Keith Briffa (videnskabs mand flittigt brugt af IPCC) har af IPCC:

From: Keith Briffa To: mann@xxxxxxxxx.xxx Subject: Re: quick note on TAR Date: Sun Apr 29 19:53:16 2007
Mike
your words are a real boost to me at the moment. I found myself questioning the whole process and being often frustrated at the formulaic way things had to be done - often wasting time and going down dead ends. I really thank you for taking the time to say these kind words . I tried hard to balance the needs of the science and the IPCC , which were not always the same. I worried that you might think I gave the impression of not supporting you well enough while trying to report on the issues and uncertainties . Much had to be removed and I was particularly unhappy that I could not get the statement into the SPM regarding the AR4 reinforcement of the results and conclusions of the TAR. I tried my best but we were basically railroaded by Susan*. I am happy to pass the mantle on to someone else next time. I feel I have basically produced nothing original or substantive of my own since this whole process started. I am at this moment , having to work on the ENV submission to the forthcoming UK Research Assessment exercise , again instead of actually doing some useful research ! Anyway thanks again Mike.... really appreciated when it comes from you very best wishes

Keith



Vindmøller er IN!! Vedvarende energi er IN!!!
Men vi må aldrig ofre ærlig og åben videnskab - heller ikke når det gælder klima.
Redigeret d. 25-03-2011 10:36
07-04-2011 08:11
Frank Lansner
★★★★★
(4537)
Gillard, Herald Sun:

"We're all greenies at heart. But extremists and climate alarmists who have hijacked the green movement have done incalculable damage to the cause of sensible environmentalism."


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/greens-need-to-weed-out-extremists/story-e6frfhqf-1226034914157
19-04-2011 11:07
Frank Lansner
★★★★★
(4537)
Andy Revkin (der har dækket klimadebatten i årevis) for NY Times:

"those dismissing human-driven global warming tend to have a more accurate picture of the basic science than those alarmed by it."


http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/18/another-inconvenient-web-posting-disappeared/#more-38224

Men Uhh Ohh det blev redigeret væk, og der peges nu på et studie fra Yale university der når følgende resultat:

"...this study also found that for some knowledge questions the Doubtful and Dissmissive [skeptics of man-made global warming] have as good an understanding, and in some cases better, than the Alarmed and Concerned."

Redigeret d. 19-04-2011 11:08
20-04-2011 09:01
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
UNH Carsey Institute: Americans believe climate change is occurring, but disagree on why (19/4-11)

Most Americans now agree that climate change is occurring, but still disagree on why, with opinions about the cause of climate change defined by political party, not scientific understanding, according to new research from the Carsey Institute at the University of New Hampshire.

Lawrence Hamilton, professor of sociology and senior fellow with the UNH Carsey Institute:

"Although there remains active discussion among scientists on many details about the pace and effects of climate change, no leading science organization disagrees that human activities are now changing the Earth's climate. The strong scientific agreement on this point contrasts with the partisan disagreement seen on all of our surveys.....However, most people gather information about climate change not directly from scientists but indirectly, for example through news media, political activists, acquaintances, and other nonscience sources. Their understanding reflects not simply scientific knowledge, but rather the adoption of views promoted by political or opinion leaders they follow. People increasingly choose news sources that match their own views. Moreover, they tend to selectively absorb information even from this biased flow, fitting it into their pre-existing beliefs"

fed min


Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
20-04-2011 09:54
GLARProfilbillede★★★★☆
(1023)
@Rick_UK

Et udmærket citat:

Det der faktisk står er at Amerikanerne havde forventet mere kulde efter ophøret af Den Lille Istid.

Et udmærket emne for en sociologi-professor at tage fat på.
20-04-2011 10:18
Kosmos
★★★★★
(3946)
Et udmærket emne for en sociologi-professor at tage fat på

- hvortil kommer, at han med udsagnet:

no leading science organization disagrees that human activities are now changing the Earth's climate

- reelt løber åbne døre ind!: Det er vist yderst få (indregnet undertegnede), der vil påstå, at menneskelige aktiviteter ingen klimaindflydelse har; dér hvor vandene skiller er, når størrelsen/betydningen af de menneskelige aktiviteter skal kvantificeres i forhold til moder naturs indflydelse!
20-04-2011 16:51
kulden-varmenProfilbillede★★★★★
(2054)
Kosmos skrev:

no leading science organization disagrees that human activities are now changing the Earth's climate

- reelt løber åbne døre ind!: Det er vist yderst få (indregnet undertegnede), der vil påstå, at menneskelige aktiviteter ingen klimaindflydelse har; dér hvor vandene skiller er, når størrelsen/betydningen af de menneskelige aktiviteter skal kvantificeres i forhold til moder naturs indflydelse!


Kan man modbevise påstanden "Nu ændre mennesket på jordens klima"?

Nej, for det kræver at man kender jordens klima i alle detaljer. Og det kommer man muligvis aldrig til.


15-06-2011 15:03
rick_uk
★★★★☆
(1140)
Fra AP: Goodnight sun: Sunspots may disappear for years (14/6-11)

The sun is heading into an unusual and extended hibernation, scientists predict. Around 2020, sunspots may disappear for years, maybe decades.

There are questions about what this means for Earth's climate. Three times in the past the regular 11-year solar cycle has gone on an extended vacation — at the same time as cool periods on Earth.

Hill and colleagues wouldn't discuss the effects of a quiet sun on temperature or global warming.

"If our predictions are true, we'll have a wonderful experiment that will determine whether the sun has any effect on global warming," Hill said.



Vh rick

Vi har hørt varslerne. Klokken tikker....Informerede valg.
21-08-2011 01:36
Frank Lansner
★★★★★
(4537)
Dr Art Raiche, Afhopper fra CSIRO (Australien) fortæller hvordan step for step dette videnskabelige organ er gået fra reel forskning til at være et organ der systematisk kun må levere resultater der harmonerer med politikiske dogmer. Kommer med nye eksempler på videnskabs folk i unåde efter at de har udtalt eller publiceret fakta der ikke var i tråd med politiken.

"Management learned how to bring the most senior climate scientist under their control. It was OK to think independently...as long as Management approved of it.

We were given very strict, VERY strict guidelines on not publishing anything or publicly discussing any research that could be seen as critical to Government policy.If we did not do it, we would be subject to dismissal.

We had now become a Government Enterprise. We were told by the Chairperson that we Scientists no longer worked for Australia, we had to learn that we worked for the CSIRO."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxCzW6RWoLg
Side 10 af 13<<<89101112>>>





Deltag aktivt i debatten Bemærkelsesværdige citater.....:

Husk mig

▲ Til toppen
Afstemning
Bør der indføres en klimaafgift på oksekød, som foreslået af Etisk Råd?

Ja

Nej

Ved ikke


Tak for støtten til driften af Klimadebat.dk.
Copyright © 2007-2016 Klimadebat.dk | Kontakt | Privatlivspolitik